AFL's Kangaroos aim to end debt

If this sort of thing is partially funded by players, it sounds a bit like they're starting to burn the furniture.

Thanks for clarifying Rick. Any idea how Richmond's trip was funded?

Some of it was by the players and the rest of it was from private businessmen. When Scott initially pitched the idea Brayshaw said it's a great idea, but we can't fund it so you'll have to find the money. I'm not sure what the exact cost and split is between the people funding it but the money definitely comes from those two sources.

How was it funded? Something like that would cost at least $100,000, probably around $150,000.

The Utah trip isn't funded by North Melbourne, so it's not like the loose money that was lying around a few weeks ago went to Utah and not the debt.

I don't see why supporters should be asked to cough up more cash when North have decided to have pre-season camp overseas. Seems extravegent. The only overseas trip they should be making is one to Tassie. Guarantee Grand Final tickets should North make it? Wow, how many years until that's a possibility?

Now that they've got 9th place shored up they can focus on off field achievements.

Yes, fair enough, I was being Vic-centric, but either way, I was right in describing Geelong as a "smaller" club, becuase it's effectively around the middle of the pack in size, using a number of metrics (but the best the past five years on the field).

"If we are talking about the big 4 clubs that encompass the whole league, i would say that WCE, Adelaide, Collingwood would be the top 3, and then Essendon or Carlton would fill 4th spot." I completely agree. Talk about the 'Big 4/5' is quite antiquated. In a national competition, we can not ignore the fact that Adelaide & West Coast are bigger than almost all Victorian clubs (save for Collingwood.) Thus, a big 3 is more appropriate IMO.

I dont live in Melbourne, i am not a fan of Nth or WB, and i dont have any inside info on either club, but i would say that in any league there are clubs weaker than others, clubs that have less money, or are hamstrung by their locations, or the average socio-economic status of their members, etc etc . But this talk has been going on about North for 90 years since they joined the league in 1925?, but the club has been around since 1869 ?, so i would imagine that they aint going anywhere quickly, if we pull the plug on North, who will be the next weakest team to pick on !!. They will struggle on, and have good years and bad years, they will make money and lose money, but this is what a football club is about IMO, every year thousands of football clubs across this nation struggle to survive, build facilities, develop players, get sponsorship,volunteers and fans, but out of all those clubs, hundreds will win premierships, but will start the next season in exactly the same boat.

The big Victorian 5,...... have not heard that before, if we take away Tassie from Hawthorn, i think we revert to the big Victorian 4, which will probably be that way, as long as football is going. If we are talking about the big 4 clubs that encompass the whole league, i would say that WCE, Adelaide, Collingwood would be the top 3, and then Essendon or Carlton would fill 4th spot.

I agree, they aren't a small club, I did say "smaller" clubs, in that they sit outside of the big five footy clubs (Coll, Carl, Ess, Rich and Haw), although a few more years of this sort of performance would probably see them overtaking Richmond.

You'll find that when Brayshaw initially took over, he could have either elected to eradicate the debt or shore up the football department. He did the latter, and now that is all in order with increased football department spending and the like, he's turned his focus to getting rid of the debt. Considering that before this year there had been multiple profits in a row, it's hardly a situation where the club is on their knees,

and like fake ex-AFL fan says how long until the next debt crisis returns to plague North. Am i the only one thinking that a permanent base in melbourne just isn't working for them anymore? i would think the AFL would be more willing to back them financially if they finally decided to bite the bullet and leave melbourne for greener pastures.

Yep agree with this. The Dogs will also find it hard....they have a slightly larger supporter base but you'd think the socio-economic equation would be similar. I've said it once and I'll say it again, if the Roos don't want to relocate to Tassie, they'd make a pretty good merger partner with the Dogs (similar colours too)

I wouldn't say Geelong is a small club. Regional yes, but they great a great stadium deal at Kardinia Park. And their crowds (at MCG and even Etihad) are quite amazing - and membership around 40k or so (which probably has some room for improvement)

Geelong was also lucky it had the Bendigo Bank willing to take on it's debt and also its stadium contract return is the best in Victoria with North having the worse.

Debt reduction worked for Melbourne due to their rich supporter base and will work for Richmond due to their large supporter base. But North don't have either of these and will find it very hard unfortunately

Geelong FC provides a model for the smaller clubs, and a lesson that it is possible to work your way out of debt.

All very noble from the 'roos and I wish them all the best with this campaign, but given they've shown a persistent inability to match income to expenditure over an extended period, I recommend that fans get ready for the next 'debt demolition' campaign in 2015, then another in 2020 or so, followed by the 'save our roos' campaign of 2023 and the 'hell no we won't relocate' campaign of 2025 and so on and so on.